From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:14532 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932186AbWJERc0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Oct 2006 13:32:26 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:32:25 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [PATCH] Centralise definitions of sector_t and blkcnt_t Message-ID: <20061005173225.GC2563@parisc-linux.org> References: <11600678512429-git-send-email-matthew@wil.cx> <45253F27.7080707@garzik.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <45253F27.7080707@garzik.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 01:21:43PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote: > Matthew Wilcox wrote: > >CONFIG_LBD and CONFIG_LSF are spread into asm/types.h for no particularly > >good reason. Centralising the definition in linux/types.h means that arch > >maintainers don't need to bother adding it, as well as fixing the problem > >with x86-64 users being asked to make a decision that has absolutely no > >effect. The H8/300 porters seem particularly confused since I'm not aware > >of any microcontrollers that need to support 2TB filesystems these days. > > > >Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox > > Doesn't look like 2.6.19-rc1 material to me... > > The only apparently "problem" has no real effect, according to you. Huh? It adds LBD/LSF support to a bunch of architectures that haven't noticed that they needed to do anything. It stops annoying X86_64 users with a question that has no effect. It reduces memory consumption for the h8/300 port. It's been submitted before. I had thought it was in a tree that Linus had pulled, but upon reviewing the diff, found out it was one of the patches that got left out. It was even in -mm for a while, but got chucked out due to rejects. Why are you opposed to it going in after -rc1? This seems like the ideal time to make this kind of change -- the mad merge rush is over and patches which touch a lot of files and have a high probability of causing rejects should go in at this point, IMO. See also the discussion around the pt_regs removal from interrupt handlers.